Leonie Haimson warns that New York State is considering changes that would make students’ personal data available to vendors without the knowledge or consent of their parents.
https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2019/09/make-your-voices-heard-urge-nysed-not.html
She writes:
“The New York Board of Regents is currently considering whether to approve a radical weakening of the state student privacy law, which would allow the College Board, the ACT and other companies that contract with schools or districts to use the personal student information they collect for marketing purposes – even though the original New York law that was passed in 2014 explicitly barred the sale or commercial use of this data.
“Parents and all others who care about protecting children’s privacy should send in their comments to the state now, by clicking here or sending their view to REGCOMMENTS@nysed.gov. Deadline for public comment is Sept. 16. More on this below.”
Open her post to learn more about privacy laws and why they must be strengthened, not weakened, to protect students.
People can comment to NYSED here: https://actionnetwork.org/letters/please-contact-state-officials-now-not-to-weaken-student-privacy?source=direct_link&
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Given the recent test breech at the College Board, only a fool would give them private data of any kind.
LikeLike
Too big for their breeches. (Tee hee.)
LikeLike
That’s great. Thanks.
LikeLike
This is an area of school life about which boards of education and superintendents can do much to help parents. If board members and superintendents educate their communities about these disturbing details, parents will feel more comfortable pushing back against SED practices. Parents are easily overwhelmed by these kinds of cynical ploys, the most difficult aspect of which is the notion that students’ futures will be hurt if they don’t participate. If boards and superintendents let parents know such threats are nonsense, parents will feel, in turn, more able to “just say no.”
LikeLike
That is why I reposted this NY privacy issue on social media so many of my former colleagues can repost it to help mobilize resistance.
LikeLike
I am delighted that a member of the board of education of my former district is rallying the community to contact Albany about changes to student privacy.
LikeLike
Even if the New York Board of Regents does not make that data available, once parents start buying their children smartphones, tablets, et al, the data collectors will do it anyway with spyware and those tracking cookies that document everything we do and everywhere we go.
For instance, use a program to clean all the tracking cookies off of my desktop at least once a month and that program reports that it deletes thousands of those spies, every month.
When we carry a smartphone with us, it reports everywhere we go. When we do a search, those tracking cookies report every search. When we log on to a site and read a piece or watch a video, those tracking cookies report what we read and what we watched.
If parents want to distance their children from the data cancer gobbling up everything bit of info about us, then do not buy your children smartphones. Wait until they are legally adults and then they can buy their own smartphones.
If we drive a new car, the car reports everywhere we go, too. Unless we live off-grid in the wildness without a link to the internet and only drive cars that were produced pre-internet, the greedy, corporate data gatherers are spying on us through our cars, smart homes, smartphones and all the rest of that crap. The more you link up, the more info they collect. They can even tap into any camera we have that are linked to the internet and watch what we are doing in front of those cameras.
LikeLike
Good observations.
My question is whether the students who register to take the SAT or ACT outside of school end up giving up that privacy anyway.
LikeLike
There’s a strong probability that kids personal data will be used for anything, legal,illegal, and/or nefarious and we’ll never be able to track until the damage is done. Here’s how the Kochs used personal data capture Tennesseans:
“At the same time, however, Koch’s sprawling political network’s in-house technology company has mined consumer data to motivate Republican voters with dehumanizing messages that depict immigrants as an invading army of criminals and potential terrorists.
Last year, when many GOP candidates across the country turned to vicious anti-immigrant advertisements to turn out voters in the midterm elections, some turned to i360, Koch’s state-of-the-art data analytics company. The company is one of the several appendages of the Koch political machine — one that includes a suite of voter outreach organization, lobbying, and campaign messaging tools.
Dozens of GOP candidates for state and federal office contracted with the Koch data company to identify voter segments and push out targeted ads on television and social media in 2018. And the company looks to be expanding its role in GOP campaigns going into 2020; more than a dozen federal candidates list the firm as a contractor.
Notably, according to CNET, i360 partners with D2 Media Sales, a joint venture with DirectTV and Dish, “‘to push TV ads to specific households that meet a candidate’s criteria ‘no matter which stations or programs they’re watching.’”
And the firm appears to still be a central cog in the Koch advocacy machine. Demeter Analytics Services, the holding company that owns i360, is listed as a subsidiary of the Seminar Network Chamber of Commerce, the nonprofit that serves as the central clearing house for the Koch political spending, in its most recent tax filing.”
LikeLike
I just sent the below email to my 3 NJ state representatives. Next, I’m going to find out what our state laws actually say, & send something more specific to our local Board of Ed.
“Dear State Representatives,
“I just learned through an interactive map at the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy website that NJ ranks “F” in the category of “Limitations on commercial use of [student] data.” We are right down there with the reddest states selling our student data, most likely without parent/ student knowledge or permission, to College Board, SAT, and presumably Pearson (through PAARC testing).
“Why? Is anything being done about this?
Sincerely yours,”
LikeLike
Received a phone message this morning from a legislative asst to my [Republican] state assemblyman telling me they’d looked at the website & will be researching this issue. Sounds like this is not on their radar, but they recognize it as an issue of concern to their constituency. BTW if you’re thinking of sending an email like this, I headlined it “Is NJ in violation of FERPA law?” Looks like that caught their attention!
LikeLike
I just found out LAUSD mandated the PSAT for all eighth and ninth grade students this year. So dumb! So wrong! They’re recommending Khan Academy for remediation when the students get low scores. So dumb! So wrong! They will get low scores and feel stupid. Khan videos won’t help. I’ve seen the invalid PSAT ruin students’ self-worth before. I had a hardworking student who was dead serious about being a pediatrician take the PSAT in 2002 and just give up her dream when she saw the scores. There was no convincing her the scores were meaningless. I can still see her sobbing.
I wonder if College Board is going to get to use Los Angeles student info for marketing. So dumb! So wrong! I have just a few weeks to research California opt out rights for something like this. I doubt the district will honor students’ rights. UTLA, our students need you! And best wishes and luck to New York.
LikeLike
Sent the note. Should’ve done it yesterday. Wow. If only faculty meetings everywhere included mention of great efforts like this.
LikeLike
They are doing it NOW. Schools and districts are out of compliance with FERPA and COPPA. District’s are adding more Tech Curriculum staff to push the so-called 21st century learning by shoving more apps on teachers and students. Teachers who don’t jump in and adopt are not favored.
From the CA Dept of Ed – 2012 memo
The profiteers laid their plans and money on the table/or under it and now it’s time for parents to fight back.
“Date: August 16, 2012
To: Tom Torlakson
California State Superintendent of Public Instruction
From: Education Technology Task Force Work Group Facilitators
• Vanitha Chandrasekhar, Long Beach Unified School District
• John Ittelson, California State University, Monterey Bay, Professor Emeritus
• Richard Quinones, Los Angeles County Office of Education
• Kevin Silberberg, Standard Elementary School District
Re: Education Technology Task Force Recommendations
On March 20, 2012 you formed an Education Technology Task Force (ETTF) and requested a
set of recommendations, in memo form, to begin the process of preparing a California Education
Technology Blueprint. You asked the group to help prioritize the issues facing California as we
commit to creating an educational system where no child is left off-line (NCLO).
The National Technology Plan 2010 served as our framework for the Education Technology
Task Force that met three times face-to-face. Between Task Force meetings, each of four
working groups frequently met electronically and focused on learning, assessment, teaching, and
infrastructure. Each working group studied research, shared case studies, and discussed the
challenges of bringing the power of education technology to each student and teacher in the state.
Recommendations
The work group memos are attached. Highlights of their recommendations include:
Learning:
• Promote expanded use of online instructional materials and ensure access to technology
that facilitates student engagement with standards-based curricula and develops 21st
century competencies.
• Build a political coalition to support “any time, any place, any pace” learning and
encourages individualized learning opportunities.
• Advocate for broad implementation of existing model frameworks that include
technology fundamentals such as the Model School Library Standards for California
Schools and the California Career Technical Education Model Curriculum Standards.
i
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Education Technology Task Force
• Lead the effort to find a solution to the Average Daily Attendance and instructional
minutes barriers that limit teacher flexibility in using technology in synchronous and
asynchronous instruction.
Assessment:
• Draw upon assessment approaches from multiple sectors outside of education.
• Develop an assessment system that provides feedback to students and provides validation
from experts to help students connect their learning to the real world.
• Use ranked data sources through an open source-learning registry that provides the
technical infrastructure and community practices for sharing learning resources across
learning management systems (i.e. Brokers of Expertise).
• Create modern, personalized assessments by providing essential technology,
infrastructure, and professional development based on Common Core State Standards
formative and summative computer adaptive assessments.
• Communicate about data access and privacy issues and about the upcoming changes to
the California assessment system.
Teaching:
• Continue to leverage and provide a regional and statewide technology support system to
meet current and emerging needs of teachers and administrators.
• Ensure that the use of technology is addressed and coordinated among the branches and
divisions of the California Department of Education (CDE) by restructuring a cabinet
level position for technology.
• Review current policy to facilitate the implementation of technology including online
teaching and learning, teacher and administrator certification, and professional
development standards.
• Encourage and reward teacher and administrators’ use of technology to support current
and emerging paradigms of learning.
• Develop a comprehensive technology blueprint to include formative and summative
assessment of the policies, programs, and services as implemented
ii
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Education Technology Task Force
Infrastructure:
• Ensure that every student has access to at least one Internet connected device for learning
any time, any place; often called 1:1 or One-to-One technology learning initiatives.
• Support the development of minimum bandwidth standards.
• Advocate for scalable and flexible infrastructure deployments.
• Leverage the existing regional service model provided by County Offices of Education
and share best practices across the state.
• Collaborate with industry partners and form public-private programs.
• Connect existing data systems.
• Engage more directly with the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) and the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
• Develop guidance documents for 21st century competencies that include an emphasis on
safety and appropriate use.
• Develop guidance on use of digital devices to meet the requirements of the Eliezer
Williams, et al., vs. State of California, et al. settlement.
• Restructure a cabinet level position to provide leadership at the California Department of
Education (CDE) to implement No Child Left Offline (NCLO), coordinate technology
integration into the daily work of the CDE, and be a resource on legislative and policy
issues surrounding education technology.
Learning Work Group
Recommendations
I. Work Group: Learning
Facilitator
• Kevin Silberberg, Superintendent, Standard Elementary School District
Members
• Frank Baxter, Co-Chairman, Alliance College-Ready Schools
• Michael Berg, Superintendent, Central Unified School District
• Robert Craven, Director, Technology and Media Services, Fullerton Elementary School District
• Shirley Diaz, Deputy Superintendent, Educational Services, Glenn County Office of Education
• Dawn Egan, Teacher/Categorical Projects, Lassen Union High School District
• Jo-Ann Fox, Teacher, Escondido Union School District
• Lisa Gonzales, Coordinator, Curriculum and Instruction, Santa Clara County Office of Education
• Anjali Kausar, School Board Trustee, Cupertino Union School District
• Anne Mallory, Superintendent, Imperial County Office of Education
• Rebecca Randall, Vice President, Education Programs, Common Sense Media
• Brad Strong, Senior Director, Education, Children Now
• Rebecca Wardlow, Provost, Ashford University
• Paul Watters, Director, ROP, Butte County Office of Education
• Amy Wong, Director, STEM Integration, Silicon Valley Education Foundation
• Alexander Zwissler, Executive Director/CEO, Chabot Space and Science Center
Support Staff
• Joe Radding, Administrator, College Preparation and Postsecondary Programs, California
Department of Education
Topic
All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences, both in and out of school, that
prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally networked
society.
II. Context
The National Education Technology Plan 2010 establishes the following overall goal related to learning:
All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences both in and out of school
that prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally
networked society.
3
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Education Technology Task Force
Learning Work Group Recommendations
To meet this national goal, the national plan recommends the following:
• States should continue to revise, create, and implement standards and learning objectives using
technology for all content areas that reflect 21st-century expertise and the power of technology to
improve learning.
• States, districts, and others should develop and implement learning resources that use technology
to embody design principles from the learning sciences.
• States, districts, and others should develop and implement learning resources that exploit the
flexibility and power of technology to reach all learners any time and any place.
• Use advances in learning sciences and technology to enhance STEM (science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics) learning and develop, adopt, and evaluate new methodologies with
the potential to inspire and enable all learners to excel in STEM.1
In response to the national plan and recommendations related to learning, the Task Force recognizes that
California’s public education system already relies on core sets of standards-based concepts and
competencies that form the basis of what all students should know and should be able to do. California
has for many years maintained highly regarded content standards in English language arts, English
language development, mathematics, health education, history-social science, physical education, science,
visual and performing arts, and world language.
California is currently implementing the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and
Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects and in Mathematics. California is also
currently participating in a national effort to develop Next Generation Science Standards. In recent years,
California has published the Model School Library Standards for California Public Schools and the
California Career Technical Education Model Curriculum Standards (that include technology foundation
standards), and these latter standards are currently being revised.
The Task Force acknowledges that advances in learning sciences and related scientific fields have
illuminated the connections between factual knowledge, procedural knowledge, and motivational
engagement, and that technology has expanded the capacity for learning in measurable ways.2
As a result,
the Task Force believes that California’s public schools should foster environments that exploit the value
of technology in enhancing learning and improving academic achievement.
The Task Force finds that the “always-on” nature of the Internet and the proliferating use of mobile access
devices provide our state’s public education system with an outstanding opportunity to create learning
experiences that are available any time and in any place. In addition, when these technology-assisted
learning experiences reflect design principles for personalized learning and Universal Design for
Learning, the state can increase the equity of access to educational settings for all students and especially
1
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology (2010). Transforming American Education: Learning
Powered by Technology. Executive Summary. http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010 (accessed June 1, 2012). 2
National Research Council. (2000). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
4
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Education Technology Task Force
Learning Work Group Recommendations
for students who have faced historic and persistent disadvantages. In this way, digital learning can be
accomplished at any pace.
Based on its review of research and over three months of reflection and discussion, the Task Force
concludes that:
• Digital learning is an essential approach to enabling all students to graduate from high school with
the essential thinking and problem-solving skills needed to thrive in the changing world of the 21st
century.
• Improving the digital literacy and the ethical citizenship of all students requires the development
of digital learning resources and standards for the statewide sharing of these resources.
• To be “online,” digital learning must include any time, any place, any pace.
III. Key Recommendations and Options
A. To move California public schools from static text-based resources to dynamic, interactive,
adaptive multimedia content that engages, empowers, and connects students to all forms of
learning, the Task Force recommends that the State Superintendent:
• Champion efforts that foster increased student engagement in the use of technology.
• Promote innovation, through the availability of tools of statewide benefit, to transition
schools from the historical dependence on textbooks and toward an expanded online
deployment of instructional materials.
• Ensure access to technology that facilitates student engagement with standards-based
curriculum and instructional materials, and enables students to develop 21st century
competencies.
These recommendations are predicated on the rationale that California students generally want and
deserve:
• Lessons to be presented in an interesting and interactive way using a contemporary
computer device (i.e., a Smartphone, tablet, or laptop).
• Teachers who collaborate with students in using classroom technology, and who do not
discourage student use of technology in the classroom—for valid and appropriate
instructional purposes.
• Engaging, interactive curriculum that can be carried in a single wireless device, instead of
a heavy backpack full of un-engaging, static textbooks. ….. and on and on….
Click to access efftmemo.pdf
On a local level, residents of our little district pays way more to District Tech Staff than to on the ground teachers.
Bonds pay for the ed tech. General funds pay for books. Our District left $1.3+M in the Supplies and Books fund. Teachers were told there was no money for books or supplies. They turned to “Free?” apps. The District is began using “Best – CGI based” Accounting practicies. The book money that was never spent on books is gone. The District has a $3.5 M deficit. They said the plan is to cut spending on books.
LikeLike